Connect with us

Current Affairs

MP Intan breaks silence on criticisms

Published

10 years ago

on

YY Intan Grace Fu
 
After a week of silence, Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, People’s Action Party (PAP) Member of Parliament (MP) for Ang Mo Kio GRC, has finally responded to queries on her role in Chinese national Yang Yin’s permanent resident status.
Speaking to the press on Thursday, Dr Intan said she “does not know Yang personally” but had written a letter of appeal “regarding Mr Yang Yin’s application for permanent residency”, the Straits Times said.
Dr Intan had been queried, especially online and through emails sent to her more than a week ago, about whether she had endorsed Mr Yang’s PR application.
Mr Yang is at the centre of a legal battle over the control of the assets of 87-year old Chung Khin Chun, and is also being investigated by the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) regarding how he had obtained his PR status.
It had emerged that Mr Yang had been active in the grassroots in Jalan Kayu, a precinct in Ang Mo Kio GRC which Dr Intan is responsible for.
On 8 September, Dr Intan was reported to have said that Mr Yang was “a grassroots leader and one of several leaders in Ang Mo Kio GRC helping foreigners integrate into society.”
However, about 9 days later on 17 September, the Straits Times made a correction to that report.
“What Dr Intan said was that Mr Yang was one of many grassroots leaders but he does not hold a key post,” the newspaper said.
Yesterday, the MP said that she had only met Mr Yang “at a cooking activity” previously.
Intan Yang Yin
On how she came to write that letter of appeal for Mr Yang’s PR application, Dr Intan said she did so only after she was approached by Mdm Chung in May 2011 on behalf of “her grandson.”
“This is what she told me,” Dr Intan said, apparently referring to Mdm Chung describing Mr Yang as her grandson, “and I referred Mdm Chung’s request to the authorities.”
Dr Intan said she obliged Mdm Chung’s request because Mdm Chung was “a resident of my constituency and a Singaporean.”
She said she would not have been able to help Mr Yang if he had approached her himself as he is “not a Singaporean.”
“What I would have told him is that you probably can apply for PR to the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority directly,” the MP said.
There were also questions asked by members of the public if she had been informed of doubts which Mr Yang’s neighbours had raised about his behaviour prior to the current saga becoming public.
Dr Intan said she had indeed receive “feedback” on Mr Yang’s behaviour. She said the “feedback”, which the MP did not detail, “was forwarded to the authorities on the same day.”
On yet another controversy which had resulted from her initial comments that Mr Yang was a “grassroots leader”, the MP explained that she had described him as such because she considers all grassroots volunteers as “grassroots leaders.”
This, however, seems to contradict what other communities understand.
Over at the Braddell Heights constituency website, for example, it defines a grassroots leader as:

“…. volunteers who have contributed to community work and have being [sic] nominated to office positions.”

It then says that “every GRO contains a list of office positions” which are:
–         Chairman
–         Vice Chairman
–         Secretary
–         Assistant Secretary
–         Treasurer
–         Assistant Treasurer
–         Auditor
–         Assistant Auditor
–         Executive Members
–         Associate Members
The site also has a flowchart “for a volunteer to become nominated as a grassroots leader”:
BHGRO
It would thus seem that a “grassroots volunteer” is not the same as a “grassroots leader.”
There are a reported 30,000 grassroots leaders with the People’s Association in some 1,800 grassroots organisations.
It is unclear then if this means that there are only 17 grassroots volunteers with each organisation, if “grassroots leaders” are actually just “grassroots volunteers” and are one and the same, as Dr Intan seems to be saying.
While Mr Yang was later discovered to have been a member of the Integration and Naturalisation Champions (INC) committee in Jalan Kayu, Dr Intan said on Thursday that Mr Yang “was just an ordinary member” of the grassroots.
She had earlier also said that Mr Yang “did not hold a key position” there.
As for whether she had gone into “Internet hiding” for her silence in the face of criticisms, Dr Intan told the press yesterday that she does not know what this means.
Nonetheless, when asked if comments on her Facebook page have been deleted, she said “the staff administering the site may have done so”, according to the Straits Times.
Dr Intan’s Facebook page had been flooded with criticisms and queries the past week and seems to be inaccessible presently.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
46 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
46 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Hotel Properties Limited suspends trading ahead of Ong Beng Seng’s court hearing

Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has halted trading ahead of his court appearance today (4 October). The announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at about 7.45am, citing a pending release of an announcement. Mr Ong faces one charge of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts and another charge of obstruction of justice. He is due in court at 2.30pm.

Published

9 mins ago

on

4 October 2024

By

SINGAPORE: Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), the property and hotel developer co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has requested a trading halt ahead of the Singapore tycoon’s scheduled court appearance today (4 October) afternoon.

This announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at approximately 7.45am, stating that the halt was due to a pending release of an announcement.

Mr Ong, who serves as HPL’s managing director and controlling shareholder, faces one charge under Section 165, accused of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts, as well as one charge of obstruction of justice.

He is set to appear in court at 2.30pm on 4 October.

Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to former Singaporean transport minister S Iswaran.

The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.

These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.

These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.

Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.

Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, 2024, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.

Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.

On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.

The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.

Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter. Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.

According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.

Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.

Mr Ong is recognised as the figure who brought Formula One to Singapore in 2008, marking the first night race in the sport’s history.

He holds the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix. Iswaran was the chairman of the F1 steering committee and acted as the chief negotiator with Singapore GP on business matters concerning the race.

 

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media

Dr Chee Soon Juan of the SDP raised concerns about the S$88 million sale of Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow at Astrid Hill, questioning transparency and the lack of mainstream media coverage. He called for clarity on the buyer, valuation, and potential conflicts of interest.

Published

2 weeks ago

on

23 September 2024

By

On Sunday (22 Sep), Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), issued a public statement on Facebook, expressing concerns regarding the sale of Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) at Astrid Hill.

Dr Chee questioned the transparency of the S$88 million transaction and the absence of mainstream media coverage despite widespread discussion online.

According to multiple reports cited by Dr Chee, Mr Shanmugam’s property was transferred in August 2023 to UBS Trustees (Singapore) Pte Ltd, which holds the property in trust under the Jasmine Villa Settlement.

Dr Chee’s statement focused on two primary concerns: the lack of response from Mr Shanmugam regarding the transaction and the silence of major media outlets, including Singapore Press Holdings and Mediacorp.

He argued that, given the ongoing public discourse and the relevance of property prices in Singapore, the sale of a high-value asset by a public official warranted further scrutiny.

In his Facebook post, Dr Chee posed several questions directed at Mr Shanmugam and the government:

  1. Who purchased the property, and is the buyer a Singaporean citizen?
  2. Who owns Jasmine Villa Settlement?
  3. Were former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and current Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed of the transaction, and what were their responses?
  4. How was it ensured that the funds were not linked to money laundering?
  5. How was the property’s valuation determined, and by whom?

The Astrid Hill property, originally purchased by Mr Shanmugam in 2003 for S$7.95 million, saw a significant increase in value, aligning with the high-end status of District 10, where it is located. The 3,170.7 square-meter property was sold for S$88 million in August 2023.

Dr Chee highlighted that, despite Mr Shanmugam’s detailed responses regarding the Ridout Road property, no such transparency had been offered in relation to the Astrid Hill sale.

He argued that the lack of mainstream media coverage was particularly concerning, as public interest in the sale is high. Dr Chee emphasized that property prices and housing affordability are critical issues in Singapore, and transparency from public officials is essential to maintain trust.

Dr Chee emphasized that the Ministerial Code of Conduct unambiguously states: “A Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”

He concluded his statement by reiterating the need for Mr Shanmugam to address the questions raised, as the matter involves not only the Minister himself but also the integrity of the government and its responsibility to the public.

The supposed sale of Mr Shamugam’s Astrid Hill property took place just a month after Mr Shanmugam spoke in Parliament over his rental of a state-owned bungalow at Ridout Road via a ministerial statement addressing potential conflicts of interest.

At that time, Mr Shanmugam explained that his decision to sell his home was due to concerns about over-investment in a single asset, noting that his financial planning prompted him to sell the property and move into rental accommodation.

The Ridout Road saga last year centred on concerns about Mr Shanmugam’s rental of a sprawling black-and-white colonial bungalow, occupying a massive plot of land, managed by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), which he oversees in his capacity as Minister for Law. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, also rented a similarly expansive property nearby.

Mr Shanmugam is said to have recused himself from the decision-making process, and a subsequent investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found no wrongdoing while Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean confirmed in Parliament that Mr Shanmugam had removed himself from any decisions involving the property.

As of now, Mr Shanmugam has not commented publicly on the sale of his Astrid Hill property.

Continue Reading

Trending